Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1887-10-21
THE CHICAGO ANARCHlsTx
fhsir Case In the United States Supreme
Court,


Thsir Case In the Unisea states Supreme
Court.
APPLICATION FOR A WRIT Or IRRoR--rHB DECISION
WILL N ANNOUNCED NEXT MONDAY.
BY hai-past 10 O'Clock this morning . group o
twenty r thirty men were gathered at the confer.
ence room OF the United States Supreme Court TO
hear the application for wfit OF error mace u
behalf OF the Chicago anarchists the couAsa u
the anarchists. Capt Black, Gen. Pryor. Mr..
Tucker, Gen. Butler and Mr.. Solomon arrived
little before the prescribed time and formed
group apart from the others present at the far end
OF the room Justice Harlan was Q little behind
time, but ne did not delay the proceediuga AFTER
greeting the counsel and exchanging o few re-
MARKS with them he seated himself at the head Of
the conference table and invited the counsel 70
take seats near him He said he had prepared
memorandum which he would read, and drawing
from his pocket paper he read the following:
JUSTICE HARLaNs MEMORANDUM.
This 10 an application for Q writ Of error to
bring up for review by the Supreme Court OF the
Uui.ed states a Judgment Of the Supreme court
VI the State OF Illinois involving the liberty OF one
OF the petitioners and the lives OF the others The
death Is am informed, the 18th day OF Noveu,-
b'r Under the circumstances it 10 my duty to
case Of which Che supreme Court s S u tie United
states may properly take congnizance II should
allow writ OF error It Is quite 0ertain THAT coun-
sci would have TO report before that court the
argument which they y oppose now TO make be
fore me. on the other hand, II should refuse the
their application before any other justice
OF the supreme Court, and a. human life
M n ARE that justice might
the writ to look into the case and determine for
himself whether writ Of error should be allowed
papers to some other member Of the court, and so
on until each justice had been applied to or until
some justice granted the writ In this way it Is
manifest that delays might occur that would be
very embarrassing, In view OF the short time inter-
vening between this day and the uate liked for
court. 'n'0 ene'' Tue judgment OF the STATE
"As the case is one Of very serious character,
40 Whatever ASPECT 1t may be regarded, deem 1t
counsel present this application to the court
In open session, to the end that early and final
uon may De had upon the question whether that
court mas jurisdiction 70 review the judgment in
this case There Is no reason why 1T may not be
presented to The court al its session to-day. Coun-
sci may state that the application Is made to the
court pursuant to my direction"
then, Judge9"
Justice Harlan-"Yes, sirn
Gen. PryOr-"At what hour?o
Justice Harlan-"At II O'Clock. The court meets
" and the motion will be In order as soon as we
| are through admitting members to the bar"
Mr.. Tucker-"ls this motion day."
Justice Harlan-"Any day Is motion day."
CONSULTATION.
Judge Harlan then Informed the counsel that
they could occupy the room they were In for con-
sultation, and the room was accordingly cleared
for their use. A large trunk, securely tied was
taken into the conference room before Justice
Harlan arrived. IL contained the record OF the
case as made before the Illinois courts
THE sUPKENR COURT ROOM CROWDED
BY some means the report OF the action OF JUS
| tice Harlan In ordering the anarchists petition
presented to the full benchi spread rapidly enough
to crowd the supreme Court room even before the
n 1,ffi, thato f
GERS OF the court kept the eager crowd FROM tnvad
Ing The precincts within the ailing reserved for
moments before IL O'Clock. and Took seats Along
slde each other. When the court was convened
Mr. Tucker ose and all eyes were strained in his
direction, surprising that he was about to present
the petition, but he only moved that capt. Black
and Mr.. SalomOn, the Chicago counsel on that side
ol the case, be admitted 10 the bar.
GEN. PRYOR PRESENTS THE PETITION.
Several other motions were made. and then Gen.
| Pryor, addressing the court, stated that he pre-
sented petition for writ Of error In the case OF
| the eight men under condemnation in Chicago.
He briefly reviewed the history OF the $50, stating
~ 7 the men were indicted Jointly and convicted,
TO Imprisonment The case was taken 70 the
Illinois supreme Court, which reafrirmed
i. s ana ins 81 sseo
| OF the Revised Statutes the United States Su-
preme Court has Jurisdiction TO re-exaInine
| Of State where Is drawn in question the validity
OF a statute OF, or any authority exercised under
state, on the ground OF their being repuxnant to
any tile, right, privilege, or immunity is claimed
under the Constitution and the decision is against
the title, right &C. Seven OF the men tor whom
he appeared, he stated, are under sentence OF
death and the execution liked for the l1th OF next
month.
HIS FIRST POINT
| called in question the validity Of statute OF
| Illinois. enacted In March, 1874, which provides
| that It shall not be a cause OF challenge that q
juror has read In the newspapers an account OF
the commission Of the crime with which The pris-
has formed an opinion or impression based upon
rumor or newspaper articles disQualify him II he
shall state upon oath that he believes he can
| fairly and impartially render verdict in
| accordance with the Law and evidence, and the
| court shall be satisfied OF the truth Of
| such statement. Gen. Pryor said that the jury
which tried his clients was organized under this
| statute, and he maintained that the statute was
In conflict with the Federal Constitution and with
deprive the accused or trial oy an Impartial
lury;" that 1t abridged the privileges aud lmmu-
miles OF the accused as Citizens OF the United
States, and IN It deprived them OF lie, liberty,
&C., without due process OF law.
HAD ANY OF THE JURORS FORMED Oh EXPRESSED AN
oPINlONf
Justice Miller asked II 1t could be shown that
| any one OF the jurors In the case had read the
newspaper accounts Of the crime or had formed or
expressed an opinion.
Gen. Pryor answered that there were two.
RESUMING HIS ARGUMENT.
Gen. Pryor maintained that the jury was not an
IMPARTIAL one, but that 1t was partial IN ,de up In
part OF men who were actually enemies OF the de-
| PENDANTS; that the Illinois statute attempted to
make partial jury an impartial jury.
The Chief Justice repeated Justice Miller's Ques-
ton as to whether 1t could b. shown that any one
OF the Jurors actually formed or expressed an
opinion
Gen. Pryor's reply was not so definite. he init
mated mt the juror who expressed positive.
Opinion was rejected upon peremptOry challenge.
QUESTION FOR THE STATE.
The Chief Justice then remarked very signin-
cantly: "The only question here is whether or not
the statute referred TO is valid statute or not II
| the court erred In its administration that Is
question for the tate"
Gen. Pryor said that the record OF the case would
show that no such instructions and rulings those
III Lle Anarchists, case were ever given and accept
ed In court OF justice He claimed that the Ili-
nOis statute referred to denied to the citizen tat
projection which the Fourteenth Amendment to
| the Constitution guaranteed.
ANOTHER POINT
made by Gen. Pryor was that the prisoners were
compelled TO testify against themselves in viola
ton OF the Fifth Amendment to the United States
Constitution which provides that no person
"shail be compelled In any Criminal case TO be a
witness against himself" he said that in the
crOSs-exaInnation OF the accused no RESTRICTION
was observed, but that matters never touched
upon In the were introduced:
that the private desks OF the prisoners
were raDSacked, their papers and let
Lers procured and these used in evidence
| against them; that Spies desk was rined and a
letter from JOhan Most TO him found; that on the
crOss-examinatfOn this letter was read and Epies
waa forced 10 TESTIFY IN ard